Please, please don’t overflood it with DLC. (much like Batman Arkham series). I’d really like it if there was more unlockable stuff for the Handsome Jack Collection, like you beat the story mode with a character you get their head skin for a character. Or if you have Battleborn and Handsome Jack collection downloaded, you get exclusive skins for the respective games. I don’t mind DLC characters or DLC expansions just no, “DLC separate stories for 5$” this stuff is giving me a headache.
I disagree with Handsome collection/BattleBorn crossover Unlockables.
Sure it’s cool if you own both, but if you don’t that’s basically a $60 DLC. If you made a Venn diagram of Borderlands fans and BattleBorn fans the bits that don’t intersect would be quite large.
Not to mention everyone who didn’t buy THC because they already owned it all on ps3/360, also PC players.
IMO cross game stuff should only happen within the same series.
But I agree that having lots of small DLC is bad. I’d much rather pay $10-$20 for something that feels like a meaty expansion to the game. (Something Bl1 and Bl2’s 4 campaign DLCs did really well.
Nope. Bring on the DLC.
I imagine a lot of the initial DLC will be characters and maps. Since we don’t know much about the story, it is hard to tell what DLC could do for it. I am on the same page as some of the others regarding a Borderlands crossover. As fun as new skins and stuff are, I think it is wise to keep the universes very separate for now. We need to see that Battleborn can hold its own first.
They have to be careful if they do “Maps and/or characters” (paid) DLC.
Map DLC can split a community in small part (Those who have the maps, and those who don’t) but it’s not that bad as long as it’s just a few DLC.
As for characters DLC, some peoples will call “Pay-to-win” characters for the even slightest unbalance (Or what peoples think is unbalanced) and for any balance patch will come the angry peoples who say it’s unfair because they paid for this characters, and whatever.
That’s very true. I didn’t consider people seeing the characters as a “pay-to-win” move.
The worst, is that it will happen even if a character is not better than the others.
It’s the “I don’t have it but you do so it must be better”
And if he win with it, it’s “OP”. But if he lose with it, he is a “noob kek #rekt”.
I guess it’s logic… No?
So i wonder what the devs will do for DLCs.
I love how “you chose to purchase something I can purchase but chose not to” has become “unfair”.
Uh, do you seriously not see the issue with charging real money for an advantage?
In fact, this whole thread (except that cool guy who replied first ) is worrying:
WE DONT NEED DLC.
THE GAME SHOULD RELEASE A COMPLETE PACKAGE.
PLANNING TO SPEND AN ADDITIONAL ~$40 IS NOT A GOOD THING!
You don’t even know if you enjoy the game, or if it will even have enough of a online community. I hope it’s good, and fosters a good competitive scene, but we don’t know it will until it releases.
I’m not completly against DLC, but getting excited about paying for extra stuff before it’s even released? That’s just insane!
DLC in multiplayer games is iffy, because it often leads to almost requiring to own everything to stay “up to date”.
Map packs splitting the playerbase has already been discussed (and thankfully most big studios are realising this and keeping extra maps free), but other stuff can equally ostrich-size you from the game.
Bl2/TPS (and lesser extent Bl1) were guilty of this. You didn’t own level cap upgrades? You are now seperate from almost all forum discussions involving builds/balance etc… and good luck finding a online game (especially if you had 1 cap upgrade, so you couldn’t even play with 100% vanilla folks).
Games which almost require you to pay twice to remain relevant (cough Destiny, cough cough) are not good.
I’m just going to quote this again to express my utter bewildermint:
I just don’t get it.
I’m sorry, but you honestly sound like a old, millionaire polition who’s wondering “Why don’t people living in slums just buy a better house?”.
Whiny gamers gotta be whiny.
No fighting please but @Mr_Sandman has a point. From a business sense, I get it but it’s unfair when the content is on the disc (see Mass Effect 3 with the character Javik or any other game with “Day 1 DLC”) when it’s released but you have to pay extra money from the base price (usually being 60$). Guilty Gear is also guilty of this (sorry for the pun), they have 3 DLC characters, one you can unlock within the game which is the way it should be but two DLC characters that you have to pay 8$ for. 8$ for one character is a little ridiculous.
Let’s not get personal here. Talk about games. Not each other.
Who did I talk about? I didn’t mention anyone’s name or respond to anyone. Are you claiming that someone here is being whiny? That’s on you, not me.
That was a general comment, to everyone; including you. You’re still talking about other forum users. Check your messages, and discuss this over PM, if you must…
Back on topic, now.
That’s why I think if (let’s be real: when) BattleBorn does DLC they will have a problem.
Borderlands priced DLC characters at $10, which was a point of contention, but was mostly accepted.
But they simply cannot charge $10 in BattleBorn, even if the “4x the everything compared to Borderlands is true” because people will perceive it as paying 1/6 retail price for 1/25 of the roster. Compared to 1/6 of price for an additional 25% of the base roster.
It would not go down well with anyone.
Not to mention the fact that adding additional characters might not be that exciting: there’s already 25, it’s going to take a hella long time for someone to extensively play and judge each one.
How would you market extra characters when most people still probably only use a fraction of the ones avalible without running into balance issues?
Don’t forget charging $10 for characters in multiplayer focused game that is also full priced is suicide.
Remove the elephant in that sentence and you can charge whatever you want.
I think they should take after Evolve with free Map DLC. its a good way to keep the community happy, plus can get people to come back to the game after awhile to try them out. This also doesn’t split the community. But if they do require you to buy new maps, then I hope they don’t match people that don’t have them with people that do have them.
A lot of games are doing that now.
Which is great, because with so many online games that are popular, devs really need to focus on making sure the playerbase is as healthy as possible.
But it would be nice to have a modern game that didnt have massive updates and just worked straight out of the box forever…